Prunyuu~! Thanks for the data. Now, I'm no magical code magician myself, but I would be very surprised if they *didn't* recycle the engine of DoS for the other two games. It's possible that DoS may have been the least profitable, but judging by the sales data you provided, the diminishing returns argument still applies...OoE sold less than PoR. Again, it seems to me that after OoE they still would have come to the conclusion that Castlevania was "unprofitable," and thus...alas...T_T

Although we can make a reasonable estimate of the revenues (based on sales and pricing) we still don't have any idea how much Konami originally invested, so the returns on the investment (profits in dollars and %) remain unknowable... In any case, it seems highly unlikely Konami would have allowed IGA to make the DXC if the DS games were failing under his leadership...

If it hit well the greatest hit's it must have sold a bucket loads worth, but then again let's look at dxc you are getting a new game and two classics the original and sequel three games for the price of one dxc was just more bang for your buck.

Greatest hits doesnt work like that. Not entirely. games that have been on the market for a certain amount of time tend to become greatest hits sometimes, especially if they dont do well. As a way to market them. Like "oh hey, this game is greatest hits! it must be good! Buy it!"

Cecil-kain, this thread is the reason I joined this forum. I fully believe you are right in your cause, sir. Having read your mission statement, I also think you should focus more on Konami's lack of a 25th anniversery tribute to one of their oldest franchises. That is the real crime they have committed, by not honoring our beloved series. Operation Akujamo has another supporter, don't listen to all the discouraging feedback. Keep up the fight, sir.

No, it's just waht you said sound more like political propaganda, rather than genuine thing.

Quote

Risk is part of any business. There was a time when it was "do or die" for the game industry. Risk was not optional. Quality was not optional. I'm sad to say, it may take another market crash to shake this industry out of its complacency.

Agree with that somewhat. However, there are different kind of risks. Like when you invest into new technology and ideas and there is chance that it will be profitable. And when you invest into something old fashioned and not exactly fresh, that probably will not return all the money that were put into the project.2D CV HD for the big consoles (not DLC short game) would be the second case.

Quote

If they have the money (and the time) why wouldn't this problem be fixed?

Because it's to late now?

Quote

Unfortunately, we just don't have the facts we need to ask for anything more specific than a "serious investment". We could speculate in circles for days and emerge from our conversation none the wiser. What more need be said?

No offense, but this all talk about "profit and Konami", sounds like speculative attempt to find some ground for your demands without having actual information on hand.

If anything, I support the notion that OA should concentrate on the future of the franchise not on its past, so to speak. Meaning it's better to demand just 2D CV HD, but without specifics, like return IGA on board or make remake of the certain game.

Also, I think I know how Konami could have worked around 2D CV HD project. I think it would be right for them to release such game in form of DLC episodes, including maybe 2-3 levels each. I know it sounds not very serious and similar to 2D monstrocity, that occupied PSN and Live, but I think nowadays that's the only way Konami could release something like what you demand. Besides, such tactic allow Konami to instantly monitor profits, without retailers and practically immediately see how much fans and gamers in general, appreaciate their efforts.

Quote

That is the real crime they have committed, by not honoring our beloved series.

And when you invest into something old fashioned and not exactly fresh, that probably will not return all the money that were put into the project. 2D CV HD for the big consoles (not DLC short game) would be the second case.

So little faith... It's unfortunate we'll never agree on this.

Quote

Because it's to late now?

Hopefully not, we'll see..

Quote

No offense, but this all talk about "profit and Konami", sounds like speculative attempt to find some ground for your demands without having actual information on hand.

I was simply alleviating your confusion about a "serious investment" by providing some extra context. Our desire is all the "grounds" we need to tell Konami what we want. It's unfortunate we don't have enough data for a clear and convincing argument, but that's the reality of the situation for now.

Quote

If anything, I support the notion that OA should concentrate on the future of the franchise not on its past, so to speak. Meaning it's better to demand just 2D CV HD, but without specifics, like return IGA on board or make remake of the certain game.

I respect your points here, but again, the specific games we're talking about are supported by a consensus of the fans. At this point, any sign of Konami investing in quality (2-D Castlevania) would be considered a major breakthough --even if it isn't for the specific games that we're asking for.

Quote

Also, I think I know how Konami could have worked around 2D CV HD project. I think it would be right for them to release such game in form of DLC episodes, including maybe 2-3 levels each. I know it sounds not very serious and similar to 2D monstrocity, that occupied PSN and Live, but I think nowadays that's the only way Konami could release something like what you demand.

The Mission Statement never ruled out a DLC game, but breaking it up with episodic downloads would be a major drawback if it takes them 6 months to complete the package (like HD on XBLA)

Quote

Besides, such tactic allow Konami to instantly monitor profits, without retailers and practically immediately see how much fans and gamers in general, appreaciate their efforts.

I still think Rebirth and HD were Konami's way of testing the market. Hopefully those games delivered some encouraging results...[/quote]

Cecil-kain, this thread is the reason I joined this forum. I fully believe you are right in your cause, sir. Having read your mission statement, I also think you should focus more on Konami's lack of a 25th anniversery tribute to one of their oldest franchises. That is the real crime they have committed, by not honoring our beloved series.

I respect your stance, but I disagree. The 25th anniversary stuff is small potatoes.

The real crime they've committed to me is Lords of Shadow. It makes Castlevania seem as though it's ashamed to be itself and betrays the fans of the series under the cause of trying to get new fans. New fans are fine and dandy, but not at the expense of the series' heart, soul, and identity. Goblins, orcs, trolls, giants, and reboots are not what is needed to entice potential fans.

Besides that, Konami just let the series flounder by neglecting it while also asking too much of it too fast with too little resources, which created a string of lackluster (PoR, DoS, LoI, CoD) and stupidly weird (Judgment, Harmony of Despair) titles.

I believe in pragmatism, especially, when it concerns money and big companies.

Quote

The Mission Statement never ruled out a DLC game, but breaking it up with episodic downloads would be a major drawback if it takes them 6 months to complete the package (like HD on XBLA)

At least it's more realistic somewhat. And expectance could be worth it.

Quote

I still think Rebirth and HD were Konami's way of testing the market. Hopefully those games delivered some encouraging results...

HD was mishmash of "metroidvanias" legacy. I doubt that it could be considered "quality" entry in the series. Besides it's coop. game - one of the major points of this game and its advertisement. It's kind of make it different from "2D HD CV" thing.

Quote

It's not like non-Castlevania fans have any idea what Akumajo would be in reference to. Even if they hadn't played any of the games though, most gamers have at least heard of Castlevania.

He kind of thinks that people will think that Castlevania refer to the Lords of Shadow - direction which his project doesn not support. For him - Akumajou is the name accocitaed with old direction (2d / Metroidvania) games of the franchise. I personally disagree with this for the same reasons as you do. And besides some of the japanese releases in the series were also named "Castlevania" - such was the with COTM and LOI at least. Which make his point obsolete.

Quote

The real crime they've committed to me is Lords of Shadow. It makes Castlevania seem as though it's ashamed to be itself and betrays the fans of the series under the cause of trying to get new fans. New fans are fine and dandy, but not at the expense of the series' heart, soul, and identity. Goblins, orcs, trolls, giants, and reboots are not what is needed to entice potential fans.

And this is the reason why I not support OA or any of the old school fans."Crime", "heart and soul", "diginity" - LOL. Sewious business. It's just a video game series, the one that doesn't belong to you.You said yourself that last entries were luckluster and weird. It was obvious that something radical would be done with the franchise at that point. And now you aggravated.

Such is the fans - they won't move a finger as long as franchise gives them at least 40% of satisfaction. DOS and POR were among of the worst games for the different reasons, but did fans rebelled? Nope.Because those games gave'em "metroidvania", however how much "heart and soul" of the series the had is questionable at best. It's like the old joke about mice who were crying, but continued to eat the cactus.

I believe in pragmatism, especially, when it concerns money and big companies.

The arts, entertainment, and other luxuries aren't exactly pragmatic businesses. There's plenty of risk and volatility to keep these industries on their toes --that's why we see so many familiar IPs recycled as a constant crutch.

Quote

HD was mishmash of "metroidvanias" legacy. I doubt that it could be considered "quality" entry in the series. Besides it's coop. game - one of the major points of this game and its advertisement. It's kind of make it different from "2D HD CV" thing.

That's a fair point, but I was thinking in more general terms. HD may have possibly reached a new audience that never played the DS games --the recycled mishmash wouldn't be as offensive to them. If Rebirth and HD experienced good sales and high profit margins, that may possibly have given Konami some real encouragement to make a serious investment in the Akumajo games later in the future. That was my only point.

Quote

He kind of thinks that people will think that Castlevania refer to the Lords of Shadow - direction which his project doesn not support. For him - Akumajou is the name accocitaed with old direction (2d / Metroidvania) games of the franchise.

The arts, entertainment, and other luxuries aren't exactly pragmatic businesses.

When art produced by big companies it inevitably will rely on pragmatism.

Quote

If Rebirth and HD experienced good sales and high profit margins, that may possibly have given Konami some real encouragement to make a serious investment in the Akumajo games later in the future. That was my only point.

I agree, but so far Konami didn't seemingly took it into consideration.

That's a fair point, but I was thinking in more general terms. HD may have possibly reached a new audience that never played the DS games --the recycled mishmash wouldn't be as offensive to them. If Rebirth and HD experienced good sales and high profit margins, that may possibly have given Konami some real encouragement to make a serious investment in the Akumajo games later in the future. That was my only point.

This. I didn't play the DS games until after I played HD. This made me want to go and check the games out.

HD, despite being lazy, is actually a very solid game. It's just that everyone's taking so much offense to it reusing the resources from previous games that some of them don't even give it a shot. I've only played Multiplayer once (I plan on getting it again on PS3 for the local co-op), but the Single Player is still really good, despite the looooooooong stages.

My only beef with the game (other than no local co-op in the 360 version and lack of new DLC)? The little gimmicks from the games it takes itself from are gone. The Peeping Eyes outside the windows, said windows opening and shutting themselves in SotN's main hall, multi-layered backgrounds, etc. That stuff's gone.

Logged

Currently Playing:Resident Evil 2 [N64]Games Beaten This Year (2020): 20 Games

However I don't think it's just the developer's fault. From what I've noticed, after the influx of 2D series switching to 3D games in the late 90s, all a lot of fans want is to sit there and play the games they grew up with, whether they're dated or not.

Why would anyone want to look at the Mona Lisa or Starry Night when there are so many new works of art out there to view?

Just because something is old or, as you've put it, "dated" doesn't mean it somehow loses everything that made it great in the first place. Mega Man 2 will always be a game that I can pick up and play in between online CoD matches or sidequests in Skyrim not so much because of nostalgia (if that were true, I'd be playing Silver Surfer for the NES right now simply because it's something I did in my youth) but because it simply is a masterpiece of video game design. Certain modern games would get that distinction from me. Certain others would not. I love my classic games, but I don't feel the need to fight the future, either. I love my modern games, but I don't feel the need to abandon everything that came before it in the name of "progress".

There's actually an old saying that somehow seems pretty apt: "You can't know where you're going if you don't know where you've been." Looking backward is just as important as looking forward, and, sadly, I'd say there are just as many folks who want to dismiss classic games simply because they're old as there are "hardcore gamers" who want to dismiss modern games simply because they're new. One is as closed-minded as the other, and likely the silent majority falls somewhere in the middle.

I won't bother touching the mess that is Sonic fans, but significantly large portions of fans from numerous other fanbases explode in protest when developers try and expand their audience, either with arguments of "too casual!" or "too different!" whether those claims are warranted at all. This ultimately drove the whole retro thing, and we started getting games like Megaman 9 and 10, or Sonic the Hedgehog 4, which good or bad, did absolutely nothing for gaming as a whole.

That seems awfully general, and probably more than a little biased. The Bionic Commando fan community seemed very receptive to a 3D BC game, especially after GRIN's work on BC: Rearmed promised a new experience that stays in touch with what came before. Unfortunately, poor gameplay and nonsensical story sank that battleship before it even left the harbor. Or maybe you mean the Mega Man fan community, which seemed pretty pumped for Legends 3 until Capcom inexplicably pulled the plug for reasons that are nebulous at best, and whose last serious 3D Mega Man offering was the control-and-camera angle nightmare known as X7. How about Contra: Legacy of War? There was a brilliant attempt at bringing Contra into 3D. Of course, it sacrificed everything that made Contra what it was in the first place, but we can overlook that, right?

And you seem to be forgetting all of the jumps that were successful. While you may be quick to say that Mario 64 sold so well because Mario can sell anything, the fact remains that it's actually a perfect translation of Mario's world and mechanics into the third dimension, making it a really solid game. You're also wrong--for all his name power, Mario couldn't sell a Phillips CD-i. Legend of Zelda made the jump successfully with Ocarina of Time. Fans of Metroid really had their worlds rocked with not only a jump to 3D, but also a completely different play style in the form of an FPS with Prime. And remember when I mentioned Mega Man Legends? Though Capcom has gone completely bonkers as of late, I think the fan support proves that Legends was a successful experiment in bringing Mega Man to 3D. The same is true of Metal Gear, Ninja Gaiden, and Final Fantasy.

The fact of the matter is that some conversions have worked and some have not. Instead of pointing the finger at the fanbase and blaming them for being resistant to change, instead consider that they may just be resistant to crap. Not everything is golden simply because it's new or "modern", just as everything old isn't automatically awesome simply by virtue of being old.

And as for Mega Man 9 and 10 contributing "nothing", I highly disagree. That would be like saying that an artist using watercolors contributes nothing to the art world simply because we now have the ability to use photoshop. If nothing else, games like MM9 and 10 prove that, in the hands of a skilled master, materials dismissed as "dated" can still be used to create masterpieces.

Which is why I have to ask: didn't Cox only say Lords of Shadow wasn't an Akumajo game AFTER Operation Akumajo made the distinction?

It seems to me that they were asking for clarification on why it wasn't called Akumajo Dracula in Japan and David Cox confirmed that it was because Lords of Shadow is, in fact, a member of a different genus known as "Castlevania". Which doesn't make a whole lot of sense, considering there really was no difference until Cox said there was.

Because by his own words he sees it as a Castlevania game, and if his ultimate goal is to differentiate Akumajo Dracula and Castlevania, then he'd be putting Lords of Shadow in the same bin as Harmony of Dissonance, Aria of Sorrow, and Lament of Innocence.

Except you're ignoring three important points.

1. The later games in the Akumajo Dracula series (such as Dawn of Sorrow--a direct sequel to Aria of Sorrow--and Portrait of Ruin) pull Dissonance, Aria, and Lament into the same timeline as the rest with both in-game references and officially released supplemental timelines.

2. There was and is little to indicate that Dissonance, Aria, and Lament have anything in common with Lords of Shadow other than the fact that they're called "Castlevania" in Japan--and, until Lords of Shadow came along, that meant next to nothing.

3. David Cox isn't exactly the poster child for "doing the research", so I somehow doubt he knows even as much as we do about the original name change and what truly makes Castlevania different from Akumajo Dracula (nothing but region and now, apparently, Lords of Shadow).

...except David Cox is the one who seems to think that there's some huge difference between Akumajo Dracula and Castlevania--which there wasn't until he insisted that there should be. Any issues due to difference in name are because he's made the distinction something more than it ever was or should have been in the first place.

whose last serious 3D Mega Man offering was the control-and-camera angle nightmare known as X7.

Actually Command Mission was, and it was amazing. Visually and storywise.

Quote

And as for Mega Man 9 and 10 contributing "nothing", I highly disagree. That would be like saying that an artist using watercolors contributes nothing to the art world simply because we now have the ability to use photoshop. If nothing else, games like MM9 and 10 prove that, in the hands of a skilled master, materials dismissed as "dated" can still be used to create masterpieces.

people say they contribute nothing because they change nothing, and in fact, have regressed by like 6 games. They removed the charge and slide, which were staples of the series, and instead tried to be Mega Man 2. 9 went so far as to actually reuse Mega Man 2 jingles. Particularly the God awful 2 note weapon get.

10 was DEFINITELY much better, and seemed to back away a bit from trying to be Mega Man 2, but still had a few of the same issues, mainly no slide or charge.

And something which cannot go without mention- The shop. having everything available in the shop is the very trap that X8 fell into. It reduces stage replay and eliminates any exploration of the stage. I want to find my upgrades in the stage. I want to EARN them, not grind for them. (which by the way, is very easy in 9 due to the broken Jewel Satellite)

Actually Command Mission was, and it was amazing. Visually and storywise.

I completely forgot about Command Mission. You're right; it was amazing. Unfortunate that Capcom did not see fit to continue with a sequel. From what I could tell, the MM fan community was quite receptive to it.

Three tunes were reused (weapon get, password jingle, and wily tower map). The rest were new and seem to be universally accepted as fantastic (a notion with which I would agree). The only other way that the game tries to be like Mega Man 2, then, is in its difficulty level--which is actually something I welcome. I expect games to be challenging.

I mean, I know Inafune's intention was to make the game LIKE Mega Man 2 (in that it should seek to capture the same feelings one has while playing Mega Man 2), but that in no way means the game tries to be a carbon copy of Mega Man 2. I think 9 is successful at being its own entity.

10 was DEFINITELY much better, and seemed to back away a bit from trying to be Mega Man 2, but still had a few of the same issues, mainly no slide or charge.

Again, I don't really see 9 as "trying to be Mega Man 2", but I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. Likewise, I reassert that this is the first time I've read a complaint about the lack of a slide or charge--and, indeed, 10 plays just fine without them, IMO, and if you don't think so, you always have the option of playing the game as Protoman.

As for 10 being much better, I would equate it to Mega Man 3 in that it's underrated, if a bit unchallenging.

And something which cannot go without mention- The shop. having everything available in the shop is the very trap that X8 fell into. It reduces stage replay and eliminates any exploration of the stage. I want to find my upgrades in the stage. I want to EARN them, not grind for them. (which by the way, is very easy in 9 due to the broken Jewel Satellite)

I agree that the shop makes things much easier, but I do feel it's more apparent in 10 than in 9. Regardless of the broken Jewel Satellite, 9 will make you use every E-Tank that you buy--especially the first several times you play through it. 10 is more forgiving in that regard.

And I think it's important to remember that the term "masterpiece" is not synonymous with "perfect". Obviously, anything made by man will have flaws--that's just the nature of creation.